Well, I can see if you could make a puppet with the rest. But it doesn't make sense that you'd fully occupy a country with the intent of annexing, and have to give a very hostile state their capital back for a few years.
So can we outright annex a country in Viki2 or do we have to do it EU/Vicky style.
- Thread starter krieger11b
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Well, I can see if you could make a puppet with the rest. But it doesn't make sense that you'd fully occupy a country with the intent of annexing, and have to give a very hostile state their capital back for a few years.
There will likely be lots of tuning based on gameplay considerations. The devs mentioned in one of the threads (about the terrain of the Franco-Italian border) that they were closely looking at many details now, to adjust it and make it better for gameplay. State/province subdivision being one of these areas. If they find out they can't recreate the Mex-US war or the Franco-Prussian war then that's a reason to adjust the provinces and states, not to redesign the whole war/peace system.
Isn't the idea of war goals that you can annex a whole huge country, BUT you wouldn't, because the whole World would be so outraged, that suddenly you would be at war with everyone... Just like it was in real life..
Play some "Diplomacy" (PI even made a game for this) then you will understand the political climate of the period (if you don't already
) or go totally insane... You would gain nothing, but trouble if you gobbled up too much at a time, because all your allies would stab you in the back...
An example is Prussia in 1864-1870 taking provinces of their neighbours (which they had some legitimacy in) and uniting as Germany. But first after a win in WWI could they force a customs union on every country from France to Denmark to Italy and anything in between (indirect annexation through confederalism with time turning to federalism... just like they did Germany).
Prussia needed 3 small wars to unite and then one great war, to rewrite the map totally.
Sidenote: Germany annexed Bohemia and Monrovia, Austria and parts of Poland and Italy in WWII, France was occupied and historians expect they would have got the Versailles treaty back in their face, had Germany won... But they where never annexed.
Vichy was set up, so the French would fight for their own colonies, since Germany didn't have the manpower to occupy them, and they knew France wouldn't just let the UK take them over.. There was also no reason to occupy the south of France, when you are fighting the UK and Italy might get pissed of if you take parts of the Mare Nostrum coast.. And you need them for Barbarossa...
Play some "Diplomacy" (PI even made a game for this) then you will understand the political climate of the period (if you don't already
) or go totally insane... You would gain nothing, but trouble if you gobbled up too much at a time, because all your allies would stab you in the back...An example is Prussia in 1864-1870 taking provinces of their neighbours (which they had some legitimacy in) and uniting as Germany. But first after a win in WWI could they force a customs union on every country from France to Denmark to Italy and anything in between (indirect annexation through confederalism with time turning to federalism... just like they did Germany).
Prussia needed 3 small wars to unite and then one great war, to rewrite the map totally.
Sidenote: Germany annexed Bohemia and Monrovia, Austria and parts of Poland and Italy in WWII, France was occupied and historians expect they would have got the Versailles treaty back in their face, had Germany won... But they where never annexed.
Vichy was set up, so the French would fight for their own colonies, since Germany didn't have the manpower to occupy them, and they knew France wouldn't just let the UK take them over.. There was also no reason to occupy the south of France, when you are fighting the UK and Italy might get pissed of if you take parts of the Mare Nostrum coast.. And you need them for Barbarossa...
No?
The idea behind the system is that nations state their goals before / during the war and try to achieve them, instead of waging war to the stop and start thinking what the war was about. This also leads to escalation of the conflict, as major war with minor goals causes militancy, leading the government marking new goals to appease people.
Germany never annexed, nor planned to annex France in WWII.
As we have seen, some regions (Andalusia with Gib, Wallonia with Belgium and Luxembourg) begin split up, so I assumed there was some sort of mechanic for sub regional trading. It would be pretty unsatisfactory if the situation represented at the beginning of the game was impossible to replicate using game mechanics.
As we have seen, some regions (Andalusia with Gib, Wallonia with Belgium and Luxembourg) begin split up, so I assumed there was some sort of mechanic for sub regional trading. It would be pretty unsatisfactory if the situation represented at the beginning of the game was impossible to replicate using game mechanics.
Hanover by Prussia, Estonia and Latvia by the Soviet Union.
Some I could think of. They all have more than four provinces in Victoria and Victoria 2.
Only single state, AFAIK, so these are still viable with the new system.
It's pretty much personal preference. I think that a particularly aggressive nation SHOULD be able to annex an enemy nation which it has completely and utterly crushed in war. However, this should have severe repercussions, which are simulated in EU3 via core provinces and a lot more in MM. But I just modified the corresponding game file entry for EU3, and everything was fine.
I am sure the same will work for V2.
I am sure the same will work for V2.
It isn't necessarily possible to mod in, considering that in EU3 you had religions that were possible to be annexed at single go, but in Victoria there isn't such thing. It is quite possible that it is hardcoded.
But you could increase the maximum provinces for immediate annexation to a very high number, thus achieving essentially the same thing. (_DDEF_MAX_ANNEX_SIZE_ in the defines.txt) That also meant that you would still get an insane amount of badboy for turboannexing a country.
Last edited:
I don't think outright annexation is tremendously historical and even if it were the gameplay ramifications of knocking out an austria, for instance, in one horrific war would be too much. the rest of your game would be ho-hum, boring.
Hungary was a large kingdom and swallowed all at once by Ottomans.
Poland too was swallowed a number of times all at once.
Mamluks too were a great Sultanate and they were swallowed in one gulp.
Hungary was not swallowed up all at once by the Ottomans, it was partly annexed by the Ottoman Empire and the rest went to the Habsburgs.
Poland was not swallowed up at once, it took 3 partitions, over 20 years and 3 countries to carve up Poland, and even then it was under heavy external influence for years. It was thoroughly occupied a few times (The Deluge, for one), but even then it was not completely annexed.
All those examples aren't really relevant to the Victoria timeline as well, the Victorian mentality was quite different from the one in the Medieval and even the Enlightenment-era.
OK someone please explain to me how this was more than reasonably off from what happened historicaly?
In Victoria 1 state of Alsace-Lorraine was bit larger than what Prussia took in real life, so people are over-reacting because they couldn't possibly conquer historical territories with V1's states and V2's peace system.